From our friend starlight432.blogspot.com:

Many times the fact checkers in the mainstream media are correct, and the alternative media is lying on purpose or are just lazy.  As I’ve previously stated, this throws everyone off and makes the mainstream media look like the only credible source of information.  Other times, mainstream fact checkers purposely take claims out of context and/or distort what’s claimed.

Here are a couple examples of fact checking:

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-wuhan-lab-idUSKBN28R2UK

https://www.ibtimes.sg/glaxosmithkline-owns-wuhan-institute-virology-pfizer-too-linked-chinese-lab-heres-truth-54047

Luckily in the comments section to the ibtimes article, a commenter mentioned that Pfizer still owns research and development in Wuhan.  And, this is correct, as shown back in 2009:

Pfizer to Build R&D Facility in Wuhan, China

http://www.pharmatimes.com/news/pfizer_to_build_r_and_d_facility_in_wuhan%2C_china_984211

That’s a bit suspicious, right?

In order to have an infallible argument, it needs to be tested to see if any holes can be found.  If any holes whatsoever can be found in an argument, the mainstream media and their fact checkers will pounce like nothing else.  I’ve noticed that mainstream sources will debunk a particular ‘conspiracy theory,’ and then someone will debunk the debunkers.  It’s a circus and it’s just ‘not my thing’ to sift through it all.  This is why I usually take a step back and try not to pay attention to ‘finding the real truth’ anymore.  Others, however, may be more diligent than myself, and I’m writing this post for you.

If there is really going to be any real damage to the negative elites, it will have to go mainstream.  The mainstream media needs to be exposing conspiracies that have been/are taking place with irrefutable evidence.  That’s like asking for ‘pigs to fly,’ right?  Maybe not.  Here’s something interesting:

NIH ADMITS to funding gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/nih-admits-to-funding-gain-of-function-research-on-bat-coronaviruses/ar-AAPO3gN?ocid=uxbndlbing

Still, the alternative media can also do a significant amount of damage to the negative elites, as more and more people are distrusting the mainstream media.  Absolute accuracy is key though.  In the past I said I didn’t have problem with David Icke knowingly or unknowingly deceiving people about the virus not existing, because David Icke got people to stand up for their rights.  I’ve changed my mind.  There must be absolute accuracy with ‘no stone left unturned.’  Absolutely every single detail must be 100% accurate – no holes whatsoever.

(Followers of David Icke who believe the virus doesn’t exist may of course get triggered by reading this.  I can already see some commenter going berserk, commenting, “They never isolated the virus!”  Yeah, well, I guess that would help get Fauci off the hook for gain of function research if people believe there is no virus, right?  How convenient.  Overwhelming personal testimony, and my own mysterious illness back in March of 2020 (I pulled through just fine) indicates the virus exists, although of course PCR testing is obviously inaccurate.  5G was involved?  I don’t know; maybe?  Hey, I could be incorrect.  Others who are better at this than myself can figure it out.  I believe in you!)

If there is a claim in the alternative media, it’s a good idea to see what the mainstream fact checkers say about the claim.  Then, modify/change/expand upon the original claim if needed.  Feedback from commenters can also be used, where possibly useful information can be found.  Also, using peer-reviewed studies makes claims very powerful and effective.  For example, there are many peer-reviewed studies proving that wearing masks does not provide protection from Covid-19.

To all the truthers out there, I’m not saying to ditch the alternative media.  I am saying to clean up the alternative media in order to be undefeatable.  Go the extra mile to cover all bases.

Your Tax Free Donations Are Appreciated and Help Fund our Volunteer Website and Orphanage

Disclaimer: We at Prepare for Change (PFC) bring you information that is not offered by the mainstream news, and therefore may seem controversial. The opinions, views, statements, and/or information we present are not necessarily promoted, endorsed, espoused, or agreed to by Prepare for Change, its leadership Council, members, those who work with PFC, or those who read its content. However, they are hopefully provocative. Please use discernment! Use logical thinking, your own intuition and your own connection with Source, Spirit and Natural Laws to help you determine what is true and what is not. By sharing information and seeding dialogue, it is our goal to raise consciousness and awareness of higher truths to free us from enslavement of the matrix in this material realm.

4 COMMENTS

  1. MSM Fact cherrypickers is more accurate. On the most important topics, they are all but completely full of IT. lol

    Of course when it comes to Icke and Parkes and others, I rarely listen to them, because they always go just a little too far down the rabbit hole for me. The moment I hear "Lizard People", … I'm OUT! lmao

  2. "not a virus" does not mean it does not exist; it does not exist as a virus but the anti-parasitic medicine, Ivermectin, has been very effective in helping heal the covid 19 experience, which might indicate the cause of covid19 is a parasite !? just a thought cuz words mean things; words matter, accurate words help clarify the murky mess..

  3. I requested this not be posted in an email because of my blunder over saying that the FDA authorized the experimental drug for regular use when they did NOT authorize the experimental drug for regular use. Then the article showing the experimental drug wasn't authorized was removed from PrepareForChange.

    I suppose this article can stay, because it still makes a relevant point. However, I am requesting a full explanation regarding why the article about the FDA not authorizing the experimental drug was removed from PrepareForChange. Was there something found that debunked the debunker of the mainstream claims? In that case, it would be three levels of debunking. The mainstream media debunks the claim the experimental drug has not been authorized. Then the article shows up debunking the mainstream claim. Then the debunking of the mainstream claim is debunked. I don't think this would be the case though with the 3rd debunking. I found the article that was removed to be valid, but who knows. My head is beginning so spin lol!

    I'm not going to allow this to get me off track, but I'm sure I'm not the only one scratching my head on this.

    I had a dream of intimidation tactics being used but this is probably unrelated. I'm sure there's a more reasonable explanation.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here